If we review this original Manu Smriti, one can proudly assert that there is perhaps no other text in world (except Vedas of course!) that accords so much of respect and rights to women. Even the modern feminist books would have to seek further amendments to match up to Manu Smriti.

I am yet to read a text that so unambiguously proclaims that women form the foundation of a prosperous society.

3.56. The society that provides respect and dignity to women flourishes with nobility and prosperity. And a society that does not put women on such a high pedestal has to face miseries and failures regardless of howsomuch noble deeds they perform otherwise.

This is not merely a flattery of womenfolk. It is a truth – very harsh for those who denigrate women and the sweetest nectar for those who glorify the motherly force. This law of nature is applicable to a family, society, cult, nation or entire humanity.

We became slaves despite all our greatness because we neglected this advice of Maharshi Manu. We did not heed to this advice for centuries even after invasions, and hence our situation turned from bad to worse. In late nineteenth century, thanks to efforts of reformers like Raja Ram Mohun Roy, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar and Swami Dayanand Saraswati, we started considering the Vedic message seriously and hence observed a gradual upturn.

Many conservative Muslim countries of today consider women as half-intelligent and unworthy of equal rights at par with men. Hence these places are worse than hell. Europe followed the derogatory Biblical concept of women for ages and hence was among most superstitious places in world. Then, thanks to reformation era, things changed and Bible ceased to be taken seriously. As a result rapid progress happened. But now women is typically stereotyped as a sensual object of pleasure and not as a respectful motherly force. And hence, despite all the material progress, Western world is still inflicted with insecurity and lack of inner peace.

Lets review some more shlokas from Manu Smriti and attempt to imbibe them in our society:

Importance of happy women

3.55. A father, brother, husband or brother-in-law should keep their daughter, sister, wife or sister-in-law happy and pleased through gentle words, respectful behavior, gifts etc. Those who desire prosperity should ensure that women in their family are always happy and do not face miseries.

3.57. A family where women remain unhappy due to misdeeds of their men is bound to be destroyed. And a family where women are always happy is bound to prosper forever.

3.58. A family- where women feel insulted or discriminated against and curse their menfolk- is destroyed in same manner as poison kills all those who eat it.

3.59. One desiring glory should ensure that he keeps women in the family by giving them respect and pleasing them with good ornaments, dresses, food. Women should always be revered under all circumstances.

3.62. A person who does not keep her wife happy causes misery for entire family. And if wife is happy, entire family appears as happiness incarnate.

9.26. Women give birth to next generation. They enlighten the home. They bring fortune and bliss. Hence women are synonymous to Prosperity.

This shloka forms the basis of women being called Ghar ki Laxmi or ‘Goddess of Fortune in Home‘ in India even till today.

9.28. Woman is the source of all kinds of happiness in all generations – be it from children, or from noble benevolent deeds or through conjugal bliss or through service of elders.

In other words, woman is the primary source of bliss in many forms – sometimes as mother, sometimes as daughter, sometimes as wife and sometimes as a partner in spiritual deeds. It also means that participation of women is necessary for conduct of any religious or spiritual activity.

9.96. Man and Woman are incomplete without each other. Hence the most ordinary religious duty would demand participation of both.

Thus, those who deny Vedas or Vedic rituals to women are anti-Hindu and anti-Humanity.

4.180. A wise man should not indulge in fights and arguments with his family members including mother, daughter and wife.

9.4. A father who does not marry his daughter to a deserving groom deserves condemnation. A husband who does not fulfill just demands of her wife deserves condemnation. A son who does not take care of her widow mother deserves condemnation.

Polygamy is a sin

9.101. Husband and Wife should remain together till death. They should not approach any other partner, nor commit adultery. This, in summary, is the Dharma or religion of all human beings.

Thus those societies which justify polygamy or sex-slavery or temporary marriage are bound to suffer miseries because they neglect the core tenet of Dharma.

Autonomy of Women

9.11. Women should be provided autonomy and leadership in managing the finances, maintaining hygiene, spiritual and religious activities, nutrition and overall management of home.

The shloka clearly puts aside false claims that women do not have right to conduct religious rituals of Vedas. On contrary, women should lead such rituals. Thus all those people who suggest that women do not have right to study or practice Vedas are against Manu and Vedas. Such bigoted people are the cause for misery of the nation. We should simply not tolerate such mindsets that demean women.

9.12. A woman who is kept constrained in a home by noble men (husband, father, son) is still insecure. Thus it is futile to restrict women. Security of women would come only through her own capabilities and mindset.

This shloka explains the futility to attempting to restrict a woman to home in name of providing her security. On contrary, to secure her, she should be given the right training so that she can defend herself and avoid getting misled by bad company. The prevailing notion of cornering women within a small home is against Manu’s ideology.

Protection of Women

9.6. Even a weak husband should attempt to protect his wife.

9.5 Women should keep themselves away from vices. Because when women lose character, the entire society is destroyed.

5.149. A woman should always ensure that she is protected. It is duty of father, husband and son to protect her.

Please note that this protection does not imply restriction as clear from verse 9.12 cited in previous section. But a society that does not protect its womenfolk from attacks of perverts writes its own destiny of doom.

It is because of this inspiration that many a brave warriors laid their lives to protect the dignity of their women when butchers from West and Central Asia invaded our nation. The sacrifices of Alha-Udal and valor of Maharana Pratap brings a gush of glory in our blood.

Its a shame that despite such a chivalrous foundation of our culture, we have women either oppressed in backyard of homes or commoditized as sensual-items instigating lust. When we ourselves have turned invaders instead of protectors of dignity of women, who can help us!

Marriage of Women

9.89. It is better to keep the daughter unmarried than force her to marry an undeserving person.

9.90-91. A woman can choose her own husband after attaining maturity. If her parents are unable to choose a deserving groom, she can herself choose her husband.

Thus the concept of parents deciding the groom for their daughter is against Manu. A mature daughter has full rights to choose her husband. Parents act as facilitators for the marriage and not final decision makers, as wrongly practiced in many societies.

Property Rights of Women

9.130. A daughter is equivalent to a son. In her presence, how can any one snatch away her right over the property.

9.131. A daughter alone has the right over personal property of her mother.

Thus, as per Manu, while daughter has equal share as her brothers over property of her father, she has exclusive rights over property of her mother. The reason for this special treatment of women is to ensure that women are never at mercy of anyone. After all happy dignified women form the foundation of a happy society!

9.212-213. If a person has no kins or wife, then his wealth be distributed equally among his brothers and sisters. If the elder brother refuses to give due share to other brothers and sisters, he is punishable by law.

To further ensure safety of women, Manu recommended harsh punishments for those who rob away wealth of a woman, even if they are her relatives.

8.28-29. If a woman is alone because she has no children, or no men to provide for her security in her family, or is widow, or whose husband has gone abroad, or who is unwell, then it is duty of the government to ensure her safety and security. If her wealth is robbed by her relatives or friends, then the government should provide strict punishment to the culprits and have her wealth returned back.

Prohibition of Dowry

3.52. Those relatives who rob away or thrive on wealth, property, vehicles or dresses of a woman or her family are wiliest of people.

Thus any kind of dowry is a strict NO NO as per Manu Smriti. No one should dare attempt to take away the property of a woman.

The next shloka takes this concept further and states that even slightest exchange of tangible items amounts to sale/purchase and hence against principles of noble marriage. In fact Manu Smriti suggests that a marriage along with dowry is marriage of ‘Devils’ or Asuri Vivah.

Strict Punishment for harming Women

8.323. Those who abduct women should be given death sentence.

9.232. Those who kill women, children or scholarly virtuous people should be given strictest punishment.

8.352. Those who rape or molest women or incite them into adultery should be given harshest punishment that creates fear among others to even think of such a crime.

Interestingly, a judge of sessions court suggested today that castration seems the best punishment to prevent alarming increase in rape cases. Refer http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Castrate-child-rapists-Delhi-judge-suggests/articleshow/8130553.cms

We are in agreement with such a law.

8. 275. One should be punished if he puts false allegations or demeans mother, wife or daughter.

8.389. Those who abandon their mother, father, wife or children without any reasonable reason should face severe punishments.

Ladies First

The concept of Ladies First seems to originate from Manu Smriti.

2.138. A man in a vehicle should give way to the following – aged person, diseased person, one carrying burden, groom, king, student and a woman.

3.114. One should feed the following even before feeding the guests – newly married women, girls, and pregnant women.

May we all work together to implement this true Manuvaad by showering respect and ensuring dignity of the motherly force. How else can prosperity be restored in the society, nation and world?

Disclaimer: We believe in "Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam" (entire humanity is my own family). "Love all, hate none" is one of our slogans. Striving for world peace is one of our objectives. For us, entire humanity is one single family without any artificial discrimination on basis of caste, gender, region and religion. By Quran and Hadiths, we do not refer to their original meanings. We only refer to interpretations made by fanatics and terrorists to justify their kill and rape. We highly respect the original Quran, Hadiths and their creators. We also respect Muslim heroes like APJ Abdul Kalam who are our role models. Our fight is against those who misinterpret them and malign Islam by associating it with terrorism. For example, Mughals, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and every other person who justifies sex-slavery, rape of daughter-in-law and other heinous acts. Please read Full Disclaimer.

I am founder of Agniveer. Pursuing Karma Yog.
I am an alumnus of IIT-IIM and hence try to find my humble ways to repay for the most wonderful educational experience that my nation gifted me with. I am also on Quora.

i think you need to get your research done well. of course, he has given importance to women and asked that women should be treated well but not because they deserved it but because that would give men a position in heaven. Other than that there are so many instances in the book that degrade women and give them unfair treatment quoting them would take pages..things like dowry, child marriage, divorce all have roots in this text but with different terms not as we understand in modern terms. And we all know that british never promoted sati and child marriage and that it existed even before they appeared around 1st century BC. The british prohibited it and also approved of widow remarriage.Things that Manu wouldn’t approve of. A woman’s position in the in the book always comes second. Of course many would say it is adulterated because reason 1 it is translated by British or reason 2 the learned ones who knew sanskrit gave their own interpretation..may be.. because let’s face it women were considered unfit to get knowledge her duty was to respect and take good care of household duties and her husband … but the point is this particular book has become the root for all stereotypes and exploitation of women and we have been very selective in choosing just like you chose the parts that praised women and gave them value. In the same way our society has chosen those parts from the text that exploit and degrade women and we have internalised it in such a way that today women are not given freedom in the name of tradition or culture. In any case i really feel…for you to say that in bold letters ”Even the modern feminist books would have to seek further amendments to match up to Manu Smriti.” is nothing but exaggeration. And also we need to look at both sides of the coin particularly that side which has contemporary significance. And that part is not even mentioned here.

Probably you have forgotten that Buddha is the 9 th Avtar of Vishnu. Buddhism is a part of Hindu stream. If hindu religion has eveolved from Matsya ( fish) Avatar to Buddha avatar. Hindutva just cannot be rigid. not of rigid framework Hindu concept is always flexible and also individual. It is not like every hindu should have identical thinking about the concept of deity. In hindu concept even an animal or a plant is associated with some deity. The real beauty is that with this kind of thinking every human being is a hindu. Every animal is a hindu . Every bird is a hindu.Every living being is a hindu.

Leave alone whatever comments have been made for and mostly against manusmriti. The important thing is that Manusmriti is the oldest constitution to make laws for huamn beings and as group as to how the human beings should behave as individual and as well as group. In this way Manusmriti is far ahead of any constitution composed anywhere in the world. The most important thing is that Manusmriti believes that the Atma ( soul) of every living beings is the same irrespective of whether it is human beings animal , or even the plants. ( Jagadishchandra Basu proved this much letter.)

Great beautiful and highest philosophical and noble thoughts are available in the Gita and Upanishads.

As Swami Vivekanand put it the Hindu system provides for all classes of worship. From ritualistic idol worship to the highest Yoga which takes Man to the state direct realisation of God in his Absolute.

If there something useful and relevant take it. If there is something not useful or irrelevant, discard it. There is no dogma. Find the Truth for your self says Hinduism. There is no one book.

Like other religions the primary Truths are obscured due time. Still like a flowing river it does not stagnate.

“Shudr-aiv bharya………” – 3/12.Brahman men can marry Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaish and even Shudra women but Shudra men can marry only Shudra women.

“Na Brahman kshatriya..” – 3/14. Although Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaish men have been allowed inter-caste marriages, even in distress they should not marry Shudra women.

“Heenjati striyam……..” – 3/15. When twice born [dwij=Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaish] men in their folly marry low caste Shudra women, they are responsible for the degradation of their whole family. Accordingly, their children adopt all the demerits of the Shudra caste.

“Shudram shaynam……” – 3/17. A Brahman who marries a Shudra woman, degrades himself and his whole family ,becomes morally degenerated , loses Brahman status and his children too attain status of shudra.

“Chandalash ……………” – 3/240. Food offered and served to Brahman after Shradh ritual should not be seen by a chandal, a pig, a cock,a dog, and a menstruating women.

“Balye pitorvashay…….” – 5/151. Girls are supposed to be in the custody of their father when they are children, women must be under the custody of their husband when married and under the custody of her son as widows. In no circumstances is she allowed to assert herself independently.

“Na ast strinam………..” – 5/158. Women have no divine right to perform any religious ritual, nor make vows or observe a fast. Her only duty is to obey and please her husband and she will for that reason alone be exalted in heaven.

Ask vast majority if Hindus, have they even heard of these books. NOOOOOO. Where did they all of a sudden come up from. They are made up. Dummy.

There might have been some tinny minority that made that shit up, but vast majority of Hindus never heard or even follow that crap.

What you are scared of is looking at is material that most Hindus follow and heard of, and translated by practicing Hindus and approved by popular Hindus group/s. Instead, you had to jump to some obscure books that are made up and vast majority of Hindus never even heard of. Really pathetic.

So if you cannot answer, then it is made up or what ? you guys only keep saying Hindus do not just have one doctrine like other religion….so if we show a book for example, you will immediately switch topic…if you don’t know the manu smriti, then its your problem rt…do you know manu smriti was quote by the judge in the yakub death penalty verdict ?

It has nothing to do with us not answering. It has to do with if we even follow or even use that book.

Let’s say there is a religious group that follows book x, y, and z. And someone comes along and quotes some random lines from book f. Something they never heard nor do they follow.

If you did your research, you would know vast majority of Hindus do not accept the quotes or books you quote.

Also there are six major branches in Hinduism and none of them accept those quotes.

They were put together, mostl likely, by some tinny off shoot or after mogul or british rule to make Hindus look bad.

What you want to do is take material Hindus don’t even use and try and pin it on them and claim this is what you follow. Why don’t you be a man and actually take material Hindus use. Get a popular book Hindus use and most important, translated by a practicing Hindu and accepted by a large Hindu body/group. Tell me the ISBN number. So I can get a full copy of that book.

1. First of all Mani smriti is a law book for Hindus..if you ask me to show a book that Hindus follows 100%, then there is none..before our constitution was written, the Hindu fundamentalist wanted to use many smriti as a law book, 2. If you think none uses it, then why ambedkar had to burn the book on public ? 3. Now let’s take the reality in our country esp villages…1. Why they use to offer food for a dalit in plastic bag or coconut shell 2, why there is a separate colony for dalits which is still in almost all villages in oue xountry3.why the non-daits don’t want to marry a dalit men 4. Why non-dalits were not allowed in temple 5. In Tamil even now, when you want to report an issue to a mayor or collector, they say give a Mani to the mayor…there are lot of instance where the many prevails without knowing the the law book itself…you answer this now, it will give few more example later…

Did I say I’m offended ? 🙂 my point was why it is so difficult for one to have a decent conversation with you guys…I have seen so many instance where if a guy cannot answer straight, he will start going personal… 🙂

1. “Mani smriti is a law book for Hindus.” – First of all, it is called Manu not “Mani”. So try and get it right. Next There are approved and unapproved versions. Also there were over 10 different Manus. which Manu are you talking about.? You want to go into the weeds. Let’s do it. Big shot. And not all are approved. And the ones you mentions are not approved. Dummy.

2. Why don’t vast majority of Hindus have them in their house. Why are they not reading them daily. I don’t even know of one Hindu personally that even has a copy, or reads them daily. Do you know what most Hindus have a copy of, the Bhagavad Gita. And if they follow Arya Samaj, many of them have the Vedas. And some have the Upanishads. I don’t know of one Hindu who even has any Manu text, approved or unapproved. Because it isn’t important to them.

3. You bring up Tamils. Okay, let’s take that issue. Before the British came to India, and Tamil area, all Tamils did go to temples. Guess what happened, after the British came, they forced the priest to kick out certain groups of Tamils. And most important, the people who were pushed out of the Tamils started a new religion, AyyaVazhi, a Yoga based Dharmic group. They are against idol worship, caste system, inequality of women, and priesthood. Guess what happened. The British poisoned their community well and committed genocide because it was uniting the Dharmic people. They wanted to divide us.

Also British murdered many Arya Samaj as well. Who are against caste, idol worship, and etc. They believe in Yoga as well.

“going personal” – really, by saying be a man is to much. If you cannot handle that you should go hide out in the forest like monk. Grow up. I’m sorry, but saying be a man is nothing. If you cannot handle something wimpy as that, you really have “personal” problems.

“So all this caste division was by the British ? ” – Never said that. The divisions were amplified and cemented by the British.

I also mentioned Arya Samaj and AyyaVazhi. Both fought against caste. And the price they paid was with death. British murdered the leader of Arya Samaj and committed genocide against the AyyaVazhi followers. British poisoned their community well and wiped out large numbers of them. Only recently they started to bounce back and there are an estimated 10 million in Tamilnadu.

I believe you are taking the caste problem all in the wrong way. You want to look at it as if Hindus are the ones who came up with it. Which is not true. If that is the case, why is there caste among muslims, Christians, Sikhs, and even communists in India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. It isn’t a religious problem, it is a cultural problem. If I was angry at anything, I would be mad at the Sub subcontinent culture.

You brought up B.R. Ambedkar. He even points out how caste is among the muslims:

“…While the prescriptions by the Prophet regarding the just and humane treatment of slaves contained in the Koran are praiseworthy, there is nothing whatever in Islam that lends support to the abolition of this curse. But if slavery has gone, caste among Musalmans [Muslims] has remained.” (In his book, “Pakistan or the Partition of India”)

“why did I really expected a decent conversation with you guys in first place.” – lol, pretty sad you get so mad because someone said “be a man” to you. Wow, you really are a coward. Couldn’t even look at anything I wrote. sad.

Soon as I brought up Arya Samaj, AyyaVazhi, and the Ambekar quote on islam you wrote, ” grrr…why did I really expected a decent conversation with you guys in first place.” I find it convenient you try and turn the conversation into how you are offended over some tongue and cheek remark. Pathetic. Also not to mention how I pointed out that every single religion in the subcontinent has caste. Including in Pakistan, which is mostly non-Hindu.

“The social stratification among Muslims in the “Swat” area of North Pakistan has been meaningfully compared to the Caste system in India. The society is rigidly divided into subgroups where each Quom is assigned a profession. Different Quoms are not permitted to intermarry or live in the same community.[25] These Muslims practice a ritual-based system of social stratification. The Quoms who deal with human emissions are ranked the lowest.[25]

In Algeria, Desert Berbers and Arabs usually have a rigid caste or class system, having social ranks ranging from nobles to an underclass of menial workers (commonly ethnic Africans)

Al-Akhdam also known as Al-Muhamasheen, “the marginalized ones” is a social group in Yemen, distinguished from the majority by its members’ Negrito-like physical features and stature.[10] They are considered to be at the very bottom of the societal ladder and are mostly confined to menial jobs in the country’s major cities.

“Stephen M. Lyon of University of Kent has written about what he calls “Gujarism”, the act of Gurjars in Pakistan seeking out other Gurjars to form associations, and consolidate ties with them, based strictly on caste affiliation “”

Please note most of the Hindu books were translated in English by the English people who wanted to divide/conquer and make Indians as slaves (as you know all Indians were Hindus in Akanda Bharath). Please note there is high possibility that those people might have adulterated the book. In any case there is always guidance from Vedas that to learn good thoughts coming from all directions. Under this guidance good people would only concentrate good thoughts from any book/material/action etc. Please try to reject all bad things from all books. Please ponder and Enjoy!

inequality leads to injustice which shall ruin you. koi dekhe na dheke uapr wala dekh raha hai. brahmani /sanatani dharma /karma gone to hell still many filthy headed guys are not ashamed of there idiotic / nonsense craft. visnu raped varndha/tulsi wife of jalandher on orders of shiva who was unable to win . iyapa was born from visnu’s conspiracy to kill bhasmasur thereby his pregnancy by shiva. vasisth s/o prostitute guru of dasrath married sagotra kausalya had daughter santai married sringi ,could’t have son though gone old as advised gone for asvamedh yaga and sringi’s pooja khir in pot given half eaten by kasalya passed to sumitra who ate some further passed to kakeyi who ate some retuned back to sumitra to finish thus 1 beget son 1st 2 beget son from 2nd and 1 beget son from 3rd wife were born in due course of time with difference of couple hours in their delivery . thus vasisth’s grand son parasar born to chandali elder to ram while mallah was taking lunch n not to let braman wait he was ferried by his daughter satyawati who was raped thus vyas who wrote vedas mahabharta upnisads etc was son of low caste sudra woman step mother of bhisam grand mother of kauravs and beget sons of pandu called pandvas whose mother was kunti sister of krisna’s father while krisna’s sister subhdra 4th wife of arjun when krisna’s 4th wife bhadra was daughter of his paternal aunt. most powerful surya’s son karna eldest s/o kunti was denied equality by pandavas even to attend meeting when duryodhan made king giving angadesh to him refusing them any right as they were beget sons of their father’s brother . so mahabharat was result of inequality. none is high or low ‘deeds make so. how son born to brahmani and son born to kshtryani by same sudra person can be high or low unless their deeds are examined where as scriptures are in interest of few selfish people who are cheaters caused jambudvip into pieces n conversions to buddhism , jainism , christiniaty , islam ,…

1. Killing of a woman, a Shudra or an atheist is not sinful. Woman is an embodiment of the worst desires, hatred, deceit, jealousy and bad character. Women should never be given freedom. (Manu IX. 17 and V. 47, 147)

2. When he has touched a Kandala, a menstruating woman, an outcast, a woman in childbed, a corpse, or one who has touched a (corpse), he becomes pure by bathing

3. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed

4. A Kshatriya, having defamed a Brahmana, shall be fined one hundred (panas); a Vaisya one hundred and fifty or two hundred; a Sudra shall suffer corporal punishment

Namaste, Please note most of the Hindu books were translated in English by the English people who wanted to divide/conquer and make Indians as slaves (as you know all Indians were Hindus in Akanda Bharath). Please note there is high possibility that those people might have adulterated the book. In any case there is always guidance from Vedas that to learn good thoughts coming from all directions. Under this guidance good people would only concentrate good thoughts from any book/material/action etc. Please try to reject all bad things from all books. Please ponder and Enjoy!

dear agniveer ji from the bottom of my heart i would like to thank u and the prestigious Arya Samaj for your sincere efforts. Because of u and arya samaj last tuesday i converted to vedic dharma from islam . my name was wajid ali . now my name is Ayush Bharat i work for spreading the true sanatan dharma under the pen name of Acharya Bharatanand . I sincerely want to thank you for showing me the true path . my paramatma bless you.

Dear Khan, I doubt anyone would want to show proof for conversion from Islam to Hinduism. You may already know that probably conversion is not acceptable under Islam and it might become security issue for the people who got converted. Please ponder.

There is no point in arguing about things which are not clear to anyone and there is no confirmed one single document or copy of vedas or manu.

One should only focus on the following aspects: 1. There should not be any castesim 2. Everyone should be treated with respect 3. Everyone has right to education 4. Woman should have complete freedom just like men 5. One should strive towards social and economic upliftment

Instead of spending time here, let us do some concrete affirmative actions so that coming generations dont suffer and we focus more on good health living.

Hello, I was looking for rules regarding and concepts about Menstruation ritual in Vaidic documents or in Manusmriti. I couldn’t find anything mentioned in above article, and also search couldn’t find anything in this page. Could any one guide me to some source and discussion about menstruation ritual in Hindus? I would appreciate much.

The gift, the metrical, of God to humanity is Yoga/meditation. The method that any person can use to connect directly with God and connect directly with the highest state of enlightenment. The fact that this tool is not gifted to one specific person for one specific time or place is the true grace and love of God to all of humanity. It proves there is no need for angels, prophets, son of god, godmen, superman, x-men and etc. Just need to look inside ourselves and we can reproduce that same experience what others in Dharmic history have done, like Krishna, Rama, Buddha, or the Guru Gobind Singh. Yoga/meditation is not based on any form of history centrism.

Manu Smriti has been handed down by oral tradtition over a period of several years. If you see the geography of the area occupied by Aryans where there is mention of rivers Iravati and Sarawati, but no mention Ganga and Jamuna. There is no mention of any geographical region below Vindya. In fact Vindya was southern border of Aryavart. The present bengal was formed by modern rivers like GangaJamuna and Brahmputra which filled up part of ocean and utimately became bengal. This also must have taken several years. So there is no point in finding what was original and what was addition . This means Manusmriti is much much older than any modern culture. The point to be noted during this period a book was compiled for some kind of governance during this period . It is not necessary to compare the same with modern period. There is also not no need to feel embarassed about treatment to women and shudras if we see what americans and european were doing with african and indian slaves taken to various places from africa and india. You will find a big indian population in Indonesia and Malaysia , which were slaves taken by european in 16th to 18 th century. The Europeans Americans do feel shy about it . Why should be feel shy about the status of women and dalits in those days?

I definitely remeber this shloka where the boundaries of aryavarta are clearly defined. It mentions Himalaya on north, Vindya in south and sea on the east and rivers like iravati and saraswati on west.

In Chapter 2 shlokas 17 to 22 describe the the geographical areas of different regions. The shloka 22 especially describes the Aryavarta boundry between seas on the west side and on the east side. The north and south side there are mountains ( Himalaya and Vindya) it also describes various kingdoms like Kurukshetra, Panchal( Kanyakubja), shoorsen ( mathura) Brahmavart etc. The rivers mentioned are Saraswati Drishdwati. etc. The Aryans traveled southward much later. Pandit Satawlekar in his Ramayana has described how the Rakshasa in south were creating problems for Yadnya as they had never seen Agni before and were scared of the Agni. The Aryans carried agni to south through Agnihotri brahmins. That must be much later and just before Ramayana. The rishis reuested Dasharatha to send Ram to protect agni which was being destroyed by Rakshasas at night.

@Vishwas Gokhle : The problem with inherit prejudices is that people perceive information through the tainted lenses they wear. same that happened with the translation of vedas and indian scriptures by the westerns ignoramus jarheads The Shloka that mentions the boundaries of Aryavrata is this.

This Mantra has NO MENTION OF “VINDHYA” any one who can read Sanskrit or even Hindi can see that. Chapter 2 17-22 have nothing to do with any demarcation of lands. Besides the vindhyas are even above madhya pradesh, so there would have be no need to mention the seas in the purva(east) and paschim(west), please get acquainted withe geography of the country you live in and stop ignorant clamor

This website is deplorable. The author cherry-picks facts and ignore all the ill treatment of women EXPLICITLY prescribed in the Manu smirti. He should be ashamed to call himself educated, far less a Hindu.

Please note most of the Hindu books were translated in English by the English people who wanted to divide/conquer and make Indians as slaves (as you know all Indians were Hindus in Akanda Bharath). Please note there is high possibility that those people might have adulterated the book. In any case there is always guidance from Vedas that to learn good thoughts coming from all directions. Under this guidance good people would only concentrate good thoughts from any book/material/action etc. Please try to reject all bad things from all books. Please ponder and Enjoy!

Aryans who came from middle East were not moorti poojaks (idol worshippers). They were worshippers of Panch mahabootas ( earth(pritvi), water(aap), energy(tej) wind(vaayu), akaash(expanse). Agni was important energy source and Agnihoti Brahmis were given the task of keeping fire for 24 hours for lending to others. The Aryans did not go southwards till ramayan period.. In fact Manusmriti defined vindhya as the southern boundry of Aaryavarta with sea on east and west. The rivers mentioned are Saraswati and Iravati etc but not Ganga and jamuna and not even Sindhu. Ram was the first king who went southward to protect the rishies who went southwards for colonizing along the river Godavari. The Rakshasa who had monkey like features( Vaanara) were the southern rulers.They were were very scared of Agni ( Yagnya) and will try to destroy the same. Ram had to go southwards to protect these colonies of Rishis.( Read Pandit satwalekar Ramayan) . Rama brought with him some vanaras( moneky like negroid features ) to north. That is why we find mention of Hanuman even in Mahbharat.

This is what Max Mueller the man who first used the Sanskrit word “arya” (meaning “noble” as in character) to lump languages he thought were similar said about using the word”Aryan” to mean race, “an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_M%C3%BCller In other words it is absolutely wrong. There is no such thing as an Aryan race, the Europeans made it up after Max Mueller used the word Aryan to label a category of similar languages some of which happen to be Western (not Eastern) European and some of Indian languages. There never was an Aryan invasion that stupid theory has long been disproven in the West.

You can use our articles and references for it. Unfortunately, we currently do not have inhouse resources and expertise to work on wikipedia. That is why we could not even create Agniveer page on wikipedia. If community drives it, it would be great and we would be grateful.

In India, a sense is prevailing to give equal status to girls in terms of education, monetary rights etc. Ancient India reverred women and they could reach heighest levels in the society. However, women conditions started deteriorating after our country got enslaved. “Yatra naryah pujayante, tatra ramante devta”. This is Hinduism on women. It is so pleasing to see the condition of women again improving, though it will take time as it has been ruined by hundreds of years of slavery.

However, condition of women in Islam is highlighted by Ali Sina: “http://alisina.org/blog/2012/08/03/the-place-of-women-in-islam/”

We are proud to feel that our women do not need to shed their blood like Malala.

While talking about Manusmriti one must bear in mind as to when this scripture was composed . According to the experts it was composed much before Ramayan period and even before Christ period. The experts believe it was about 10000 years back. The geopraphy of this country was different . There is no mention of Ganga Jamuna and Sindhu. There is mention of rivers called Iravati and Saraswati. Unfortunely the so called experts also have not understood the content of of this great work. For example the inter nationally renowed american expert Wendy Doniger has translated a shloka which said “The Rishis go to the forest and do Tapa” which every Hindu can understand , she has translated as ” The hermits go to forest and create heat” Such a laughable translation. I do not want to critisize her because she has done such huge work and deserves lot of respect. But what i would like to plead with the indian experts here please read the manusmriti in original work preferable in sanskrit. You will be amazed at the kind of work our forfathers have done . But kindly bear in mind the period of composition and you will definitely appreciate Manusmriti.

From wikipedia The time of Gautama’s birth and death are uncertain: most early-20th-century historians dated his lifetime as circa 563 BCE to 483 BCE,[10] but more recent opinion dates his death to between 486 and 483 BCE or, according to some, between 411 and 400 BCE.[11] [note 3]

The story’s original version in Sanskrit is known as Valmiki Ramayana, dating to approximately the 5th to 4th century B.C both from wikiepedia

The Manusmriti was earlier . There was major change in the river courses . The rivers like Irawavti and saraswati changed into Sindhu Sarswati ganga and yamuna it takes a long time for rivers to change course.

Well it was a guestimate. Of the 10 Avatars as per Hindu tradition Ram, Krisha and Buddha are successive avatars in human form. It was for the first time probably Ram traveled beyond Vindya. Manusmriti describes aryavarta north of Vindhya. There are no geographical reference for nay part of India beyond Vindhya. . So Manusmriti definitely predates Ramayana. well 10,000 years is jus a guestimate.

“Ramayana story’s original version in Sanskrit is known as Valmiki Ramayana, dating to approximately the 5th to 4th century B.C.[7][8” Wikie Pedia Manusmriti definitely predates Ramayana . For the simple reason there are references to Manusmriti in Ramayana and not Vice versa. Moreover Manusmriti clearly gives geographical boundries which are for a landmass north of Vindhya and South of Himalaya. There is also mention of saraswati and iravati rivers and there is absolutely no refrence of rivers Ganga and Yamuna. Such geograhical changes of rivers changing course takes a lot of time.

Manusmriti came into prominace after 1857 the first war of independance. The East India company was dissolved and the queen undertook governance of India. The first decisions they took was to rule india as per the respective religious codes . It was easy to formulate code for Muslims as per Koran and sharia rule. They could not find any Hindu book for that. Some one suggested the manusmriti but it was in sanskrit and had to be translated in english. A british missionary translated that and it quickely got translated into German, french and many other european languages. However When British found that manusmriti was formulated much before the so called oldest British constitution and it received extremely good reports from other european countries the british decided to damn Manusmriti and it continued to receive bad publicity from english educated elites of that time

The essential difference between Hindu and other religions is there are many women gods. Sometimes they are more powerful than men gods. Another thing is there are many animal gods. That is enough to prove that Hindu treated not only man and women equal but even animals and tree also .

most of the principles are just re-iteration from what has been brought by the last prophet from the almighty – a complete set of principles, respect towards woman can be had from islam for instance – burrying the newly born daughters by the idol worshippers in arab, prior to the blessing of prophetism to mohammed (pbuh), was curbed and stopped by mohammed (pbuh).& respect towards women, was not confined to just physical beauty/ color/ body language

hello mushtaq yes i agree that some of the few good things muhammed did he stopped female foetcide in arabia i agree but he also put women in full clothing even their face instead of telling them to wear good clothes, he said women are dwellers of hell just because muhammed believed all womens are not loyal to religions and their husbands and he also said women are like dogs when they come in front of praying people,muhammed and his companions beat their wives and other women, women are like sex objects and are under men first then they can choose if the husband pleases, muhammed married many wives but told ali to marry only only one because his daughter was fathima,muhammed married a 9 year old i can go on brother

Mohammed’s first wife long before he starting trying to be a prophet of the Abrahamic faiths was an independent business woman of much wealth. He was her employee, and many years younger. Pre-Islamic Arabia allowed for women to own their own businesses not need a man to go anywhere, and marry whom they wanted. There were also matrilineal Arab societies where women ruled. There were women poets, women tribal leaders – both of whom were killed by Mohammed and his men.

what does veda says about marriage?i have read in swami dayanand saraswati topic that the main purpose of marriage is procreation. Then why people have to marry?is there nothing about commitment in marriage?

Yes,she can practice.Do not think that woman can’t practice Brahmacharya.Vedas say that the God has given equal powers to man and woman both.So never ask “can a women practise brahmacharya even after marriage rather ask “can one practise brahmacharya even after marriage”.

Yes,she can do her job anywhere.Some people argue that she would be raped outside.But it does not mean that she should not work outside.Because risk must be taken.Swami Dayanand has stated that in the Vedic period woman used to fight with weapons and her power and she was no less than man.Vedas have given equal power and equal rights to woman.

This is such a good work by agniveer. Please read this too who have doubts regarding caste system in Sanaatana Dharma/Hinduism-http://memanya.blogspot.in/2012/09/what-actually-our-caste-system-was-and.html & also-http://memanya.blogspot.in/2012/05/please-leave-my-gods-alone-request-from.html

It will be nice if, some body or religious institution publish a hand book based on our Atharvaved a role of SON, DAUGHTER, WIFE, MOTHER AND, A WOMWN for; now d days women are looking for independence from primary responsibility as a daughter, sister, friend/wife, women and, mother for a paycheck.

If all the eligible people get to know the real role of husband and wife they, perhaps can make a better decision, find a true soul mate and lead a happier life mutually benefiting eac other.

Could you please send me either such information or, link leading to such. I will greatly thank you for help.

to whoever is the admin here, i please request you to moderate comments here. You have done an exceptional job by writing these translations. But just look at all the comments. I dont care if a muslim comes over or a hindu and asks a doubt Its very good to ask doubts but dont go about rambling nonsense on each others religion. Both quran and veds are good but herethe author is talking of manu smriti so please stick to the topic and try to be social beings. Apart from that, dear agniveer can you put forward a few of the slokas which have been misinterpreted by our so called translators like griffith and muller? And which meant different thing than what these guys translated to. Even one or 2 samples would be good enough. thanks for your time

[…] There are also many extremely violent punishments for inconsequential caste transgressions as well. We don’t see such caste discrimination and abuse in authentic shastras like the Upanishads or Puranas, but the Dharmashastras are full of them. That’s why so many Hindu scholars reject the Dharmashastra as being inauthentic due to the ease of interpolations, and the ease of creating your own Dharmashastra or commentary and giving it a name of some ancient sage as the author. For more details on interpolation see http://agniveer.com/manu-smriti-and-shudras/ and also http://agniveer.com/manu-smriti-and-punishment/ and also http://agniveer.com/manu-smriti-and-women/ […]

thanks a lot to agniveer who told us about true manusamriti. till know we had to feel ashamed when anyone makes teh joke of hinduism on the basis of manusamriti. i req. to agniveer pls. provide the verses in sanskrit also of manusamriti whom u have translated in ur article.

I have utmost respect for Manu. There are many interpolated verses, but with our discerning ability, we can find out what they are.

Chapter 9 ======= 3. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age.

6. Considering that the highest duty of all castes, even weak husbands (must) strive to guard their wives.

4. Reprehensible is the father who gives not (his daughter in marriage) at the proper time; reprehensible is the husband who approaches not (his wife in due season), and reprehensible is the son who does not protect his mother after her husband has died.

5. Women must particularly be guarded against evil inclinations, however trifling (they may appear); for, if they are not guarded, they will bring sorrow on two families.

11. Let the (husband) employ his (wife) in the collection and expenditure of his wealth, in keeping (everything) clean, in (the fulfilment of) religious duties, in the preparation of his food, and in looking after the household utensils.

12. Women, confined in the house under trustworthy and obedient servants, are not (well) guarded; but those who of their own accord keep guard over themselves, are well guarded.

From the below verse, it is evident that women should shun these qualities. 13. Drinking (spirituous liquor), associating with wicked people, separation from the husband, rambling abroad, sleeping (at unseasonable hours), and dwelling in other men’s houses, are the six causes of the ruin of women.

If husband is noble, then women become noble eg: 24. These and other females of low birth have attained eminence in this world by the respective good qualities of their husbands.

Women must be respected and worshiped as per the following shalok 26. Between wives (striyah) who (are destined) to bear children, who secure many blessings, who are worthy of worship and irradiate (their) dwellings, and between the goddesses of fortune (sriyah, who reside) in the houses (of men), there is no…

A wife must not seek divorce from her husband without a serious cause. If she does, she will not enter paradise. If she can prove her case, she will be awarded decree only if she returns all that her husband had bestowed on her as an entitlement or outright gift. A woman who seeks Khula, cannot expect settlement!

cases aren’t reported in arab countries. Women have to come up with witnesses and in many cases they are sentenced for being raped. Like we heard some time back in the middle east,a woman was raped and she was proved guilty of having instigated rape by being present in a car with a man who was not her blood relative. Lets not bring up those desert tribes here. How many of you believers in quran actually read this article,manu smriti and women?

cases aren’t reported in arab countries. Women have to come up with witnesses and in many cases they are sentenced for being raped. Like we heard some time back in the middle east,a woman was raped and she was proved guilty of having instigated rape by being present in a car with a man who was not her blood relative. Lets not bring up those desert tribes here. How many of you believers in quran actually read this article,manu smriti and women?

Agniveer, I am willing to give you credit for trying to correctly translate Manusmriti to English and in the process, debunking the allegations that Manusmriti denigrates women. You show us what the correct interpretation of Manusmriti is. Through your translation, you try to show us that women are not lto be ooked down upon, instead, Manusmriti suggest to revere women. However, even your translations show that Manusmriti is blatantly sexist and does not suggest equal rights for men and women. I will discuss my views point by point.

//9.28. Woman is the source of all kinds of happiness in all generations – be it from children, or from noble benevolent deeds or through conjugal bliss or through service of elders.//

Women are always valued in relationship with other people (men). The can be a mother to their children, wife to a husband, and a helper to the elderly. Does Manu talk about the worth of a woman’s self? As a scholar, or as warrior? Why do we have to judge women by their relationships and not by their self?

//9.4. A father who does not marry his daughter to a deserving groom deserves condemnation. A husband who does not fulfill just demands of her wife deserves condemnation. A son who does not take care of her widow mother deserves condemnation.//

Why do you or Manu think that a marriage is a contract between a woman’s father and the groom? Don’t you think that an adult woman is capable of finding a deserving groom herself? After all she is educated and scholarly! In this shloka itself, a woman is treated like a child where some one make decisions of her life for her. Why can not a woman be trusted to find her own mate? Why does her father (and not her mother, mind you) supposed to find her a good husband? Why can she not be taught to be free and think for herself? A man definitely is allowed to make a decision about his life, his marriage and his children but it is not suggested for a woman.

//9.11. Women should be provided autonomy and leadership in managing the finances,…

• Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however, carefully they may be guarded in this (world). (Manu IX. 15) • Killing of a woman, a Shudra or an atheist is not sinful. Woman is an embodiment of the worst desires, hatred, deceit, jealousy and bad character. Women should never be given freedom. (Manu IX. 17 and V. 47, 147) • Women have no right to study the Vedas. That is why their Sanskars are performed without Veda Mantras. women have no knowledge of religion because they have no right to know the Vedas. The uttering of Veda Mantras, they are as unclean as untruth is.” (Manu IX. 18) • A wife, a son and a slave, they three are declared to have no property: the wealth which they earn is (acquired)for him to whom they belong. (Manu IX. 416) • None of the acts of women can be taken as good and reasonable. (Manu X.4) • Day and night women must be kept in dependence by males (of their families), and, if they attach themselves to sexual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. (Manu XI2) • Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence.” (Manu XI. 3)

>>>The untouchables did not have the right to read and hear the Vedas and I being an earstwhile untouchable feared severe punishment for doing so. No one stops you buying a veda cd and hearing it. But you/or any one else dont have the right to go to a brahmin(caste based) and deman he recite veda in front of you!!. Learn to respect rights before you demand some from others. Can i ask you why do you want to read vedas after all? The whole knowledge of vedas is minimalized into gitas by many saints( bhagawad gita, ribhu gita, yoga vasishta) You can read them to start with.

>>>So if you have a big heart then you may excuse this earstwhile untouchable for doing a copy and paste job. Poor brahmins they dont have the right to do what they believe or want to do. They must touch and kiss every one who demanded so!! The present day brahmin caste is not what is meant by brahim. A brahmin means one who recognized brahma jnana and vedas their meaning are to be studied from him who realized brahmans. But to find such a person is rare! The normal brahmin who memorizes vedas is just a taperecorder and you dont need to force him to recite vedas infront of you(he has his right to recite/disclose it to whoever he wants).

>>>However I confess that I have read Manusmriti and hence pray to you not to punish me for this crime.Personal hegemonious attacks on me do not hide the truth that Manusmriti is derogatory to women.

If manu smriti is bad, then ignore it.As simple as it!!

Why are you picking up a wrong book and blaming hinduism? Hinduism is not book based and your belief in a book(even veda) is not going to win you a ticket to permanent heaven (even heavens can be boring sometimes!!. Try indulging in sense pleasure more and see the truthfulness of the statment, it is a practical experiment!!)

-Some suggestions to you

To start with find out how many nayanars/alwars are untouchables, listen to annamacharya…

Good job posting these injunctions against women as prescribed in the Manu Smirti. By deliberately ignoring many of the deplorable commandments prescribed in the Manu smirti and presenting a distorted picture of the true text, the author of this website commits the very wrong he is seeking to redress. He is the worst kind of Hindu — the hypocrite.

The untouchables did not have the right to read and hear the Vedas and I being an earstwhile untouchable feared severe punishment for doing so. So if you have a big heart then you may excuse this earstwhile untouchable for doing a copy and paste job. However I confess that I have read Manusmriti and hence pray to you not to punish me for this crime. Personal hegemonious attacks on me do not hide the truth that Manusmriti is derogatory to women. • Women are liers, corrupt, greedy, and unvirtuous. (Manu II 1) • A Brahmin male by virtue of his birth becomes the first husband of all women in the universe. (Manu III. 14) • By a girl, by a young woman, or even by an aged one, nothing must be done independently, even in her own house.” (Manu IV. 147) • In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a woman must never be independent. (Manu IV. 148) • A girl must be under the care of her father . . . in youth under the care of the husband and in old age under the care of her sons. But she should never be free and independent. (Manu V. 148) • Him to whom her father may give her, or her brother with the father’s permission, she shall obey as long as he lives and when he is dead, must not insult his memory. (Manu V. 151) • Though destitute or virtuous, or seeking pleasure elsewhere, or devoid of good qualities, yet a husband must be constantly worshipped as a god by a faithful wife. (Manu V. 154) • At her pleasure let her (i.e. widow) enunciate her body, by living voluntarily on pure flowers, roots and fruits, but let her not when her lord is deceased, even pronounce the name of another man. (Manu V. 157) • A woman must always maintain her virtue and surrender her body to her husband only, ever if she is married off to an ugly person or even a leper. (Manu IX. 14) • Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however, carefully they may be…

1. Caste was by karm not hereditary. The lowest were untouchables because of their Karm not hereditary like we today do not like the radicals because they do bad karm not because we are having fun in making a particular strata of society to play with.

2. Some things are barbaric but those things are barbaric because of the society were perfectly in accord with the times / life style and social issues persisting.

3. Enumerate the no of positive things juxtapose to -ve things of Manusmriti lets see which list is bigger. And if there is not a major difference in size then how can you be so sure of the derogatory position being dominant. If eqaully goood things are being told for women I do not know that such a long and serious treatise can be ambivalent. If it had to be derogatory then I think the author can be straightforward negative only. Why dubious ? Specially when all the Manusmriti is so much straight forward.

4. “Derogatory” is something that you use from your perspective subjected to the life we see today and the times that we live in right now. But we should agree that all cultures at 3350 BC were harsh barbaric times. Lets not bring up a stupid stand point without bringing in the life style and evidences from those time and then study Manusmriti. Its same as wearing Burkha being a compulsion today when it was a custom that was relevant only 1200 BC because of the society at that time, or somthing like the OBC / SC / ST caste statute proposal which was important initially but right now things have changed but constitution did not.

5. Such old times as 3350 BC, when Manusmriti is written, some thing parallel to Code of Hammurabi were harsh barbaric times. This was a great treatise with such sanity and strict order that it gave to a society going uncontrolled. Thus, a great milestone in Indo-Iranian civilizations in general. Please do a proper study of the implications of this thing on the over all society and the society at the times it was written.

6. Pointing out only negatives is completely not talking about positives, specially about the same subject of women by the same treatise is called Being Bias. You read Mahabharat and say that Pitra/Bhratra bhakti is the best thing for a person and you forget that Krishna himself ordered Arjun to kill his own brothers and not thinking about this is called Bullshit research. A single treatise you read without any thing else of those times and you are unable to research it also properly.

7. Indian philosophy of all types religious or non-religious has been a Rule-Based philosophy which means there are set of rules that have to be obeyed. But difficulty with rule based philosophy is that people often misinterpret and thats why the whole caste of Brahmin was there to illuminate the right path that is for a particular problem. You seem to be a victim of this unidirectional trap. Better go to a proper Brahmin and get illuminated, rather than criticizing and bashing a treatise so serious and making us feel it a piece of filth by the reflection your filthy mind gives. Its something like a radical shouting that I life in a free world and have right to everything and hence I have right to express and here is strike a bomb and express myself. He forgets any other rules except that he has freedom of expression and there he goes expressing himself.

Dr. Pravin, I am just curious if you are a physician by profession. If so, I’d be very worried about your patients’ well being. Do you administer pills w/o double checking the illness and the medicines? Rig Veda 8/33/7 exposes your home work and the copy / paste mentality. RV/8/33/7 as NOTHING to do with women. Why don’t you post the verse from your source and prove it otherwise? And have you read the complete funeral hymn of AV/18/3? The verbiage of the verse you have quoted is completely wrong. Prove it otherwise, please….

I think Dr. Pravin is just another jihadi lunatic in disguise, although he calls himself a doctor, yet he does not even know the basic elements of humanity. I assume he got his PhD from the Madarsa Medical school.

Black Laws against the Women – Casteism and Degration of Women in Hinduism

1. Every woman must be loyal, faithful. obedient honorable to her husband even if he is blind, deaf, dumb, old, physically handicapped, debauchel or, gambler and neglects his wife and lives with his concubine(s). If the husband is unhappy, it would be the fault of his wife. If he cries, she should cry. If he laughs she should laugh. She can only answer humbly to his question. She should not on her own put any question. She should eat only after her husband eats. If he is beating she should not react, but fall on his feet and beg him to pardon her, and kiss his hands and pacify him. If the husband dies she should burn herself to death on his funeral pyre and go along with him to the other world and serve him there in this manner. (Padma Purana)

2. Women are fickle minded. Never believe them. Friendship with a women is just like friendship with a wolf. (Rig-Veda 8-33-7)

3. A virtuous woman is one who dies on the funeral pyre of her dead husband and avails the privilege of serving her husband in the other world. (Atharva Veda 18-3-1)

4. Woman is the source of sorrow. At birth she makes her mother weep. At the time of the puberty she makes her parents weep. At the time of the marriage she makes all her family members and relatives weep. In youth she commits lot of blunders and brings bad name to the entire family, relatives and Varna. She tortures the hearts of her parents, husband and other family members. She is called ‘DARIKA’ because she is source of sorrow to all.

There is no trustworthy English translation of Vedas till now. You can read Hindi translation or you may learn Sanskrit and yourself explore Vedas. BTW if your argument is that you are not going to believe in Vedas until you are provided with english translation, please first consider my below request

I need original Quran in my language not translated by any human. Allah made it too easy for Arabs and difficult for non Arabs. Translations by humans are never as perfect as God’s word.

@shabeer.H Brother I can not believe on Kuran translation available on different languages. Because these translations are not up to the mark and prove Kuran is man made book instead of God given. Because there are many rituals mention in Kuran to please Allah unlike Veda & Allah seems very obsessed with worship desires & focus on worship than good deed of human unlike Vedic God. Either translation is wrong or Kuran is just man made book. I am sure there is one possibilities exist. For E.G. read complete post.http://agniveer.com/2668/good-muslims/#comment-13758

1. ” Pitharakshathi Kawmare bhartharakshathi yawane Rakshanthi sthavise puthra nah sthree swathanthrya marhathi “(Manusmrithi 9:3) 2. ” Aswathanthraha sthreeyaha karyaha purushyr swirthi Vanisham Vishyeshda cha sajjanthya samsthapya athmam vashe ” 3. To understand what has been intended here, it would be sufficient to carefully read from the 55th to the 62nd stanzas. The summary of these statements are as follows: “Fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law who wish for great good fortune should revere these women and adorn them. The deities delight in places where women are revered, but where women are not revered all rites are fruitless. Where the women of the family are miserable, the family is soon destroyed, but it always thrives where the women are not miserable. Homes that are cursed by women of the family who have not been treated with due reverence are completely destroyed, as if struck down by witchcraft. Therefore men who wish to prosper should always revere those women with ornaments, clothes, and food at celebrations and festivals. There is unwavering good fortune in a family where the husband is always satisfied by the wife, and the wife by the husband. If the wife is not radiant she does not stimulate man; and because the man is unstipulated the making of children does not happen. If the woman is radiant, the whole family is radiant, but if she is not radiant the whole family is not radiant. Through bad marriages, the neglect of rites, failure to study the Veda, the transgressing against priests, families cease to be families.” The verses of the fifth chapter starting from 147 to 169 are all about the woman. Even if she were to become a widow in her youth, she is not to marry again. Even if her husband indulges in adultery, she is still to consider him on equal footing with God. However, the woman who commits in adultery was to be thrown to the dogs in public. Woman is not entitled to any share in the wealth of the family. The wages for her labor will be half that of the man. So goes the laws of Manusmrithi concerning woman.

The tradition of carrying away and then marrying women also existed in ancientIndia. These marriages are named Raakshasam. It is the decree of Manusmrithi that the Raakshasam marriage is a matter of right for the Kshatriya (3:23,24).

Click on link or paste link in address bar, then clik on 92 number shown below the page, bring scroll down on page 930 or starting reading from 10/195/1, in starting regarding who is Pururava & Urvasi mentioned. Please read attentively.

Krishna clearly says in Gita he is the God creator and maintainer of the world.

So it is advised to leave all religions and follow Krishna. That is the only way of seeking truth otherwise with limitation of human body and mind its not possible to realize truth. Surrender unto Krishna and he will take care of everything he is all mighty.

How are you going to check whether the meanings given by Krishna are right or wrong? Do you know Sanskrit? Or are you going to believe in him blindly? Or are you going to judge his translations based on those of Christian Missionaries Griffith and Muller’s?

@shabeer Brother what you find wrong in meaning Rigveda mantra 10/95/15: (PURURAVAHA) He who gives order to number of army troops under him i.e., commander of army/king (Ma) not (MRITAHA) meet with death.

Meaning/Idea- Oh King! Do not meet with death uselessly. (MA) not (PRA PAPTAHA) fall in a pit.

Meaning/Idea- Do not meet with downfall in your life. (VRIKASAHA) wolves (MA) not (TVA) you (ASHEEVASAHA) unauspicious/not beneficial (U KSHANN) definitely eat away.

Meaning/Idea- Oh King! the unauspicious wolves may not definitely eat you away. (STRAINNANI) with regards to lady (SAKHYANI) friendly connection i.e., worldly love (NA VAI) never (SANTI) permanently established i.e., are not auspicious.

Meaning/idea: Relations with lady based on worldly love only are never established permanently i.e., are never auspicious. (ETA) the said relations (HRIDYANI) are like a cruel heart (SALA VRIKANNAM) of wolves who attack forcefully.

Idea: The idea of the mantra is that when a man becomes sensuous and makes contact with several ladies or makes several sexual contacts with his wife even then he loses his mental as well as physical power and meets with early death uselessly. Even in some cases, he commits suicide. Some people go to the jungles where they commit suicide and their body flesh is eaten away by wild animals like wolves etc. So, the mantra warns against the sexual attachment with ladies and maintains Brahamcharya stage in family life like several Rishi-Munis, Shri Ram, Shri Krishna Maharaj etc. In the present world also, There are several cases of such instances. God does not allow the lady to be seen with bad intention mainly sexual. Physical charms never make everlasting love/relations. It is only a love which based on soul and the said love is everlasting. The sexual relation is like an attack of cruel wolves who eat the flesh of his hunt cruelly and immediately. Thus, the uncontrolled sexual relation with lady/ladies attack the body of man to eat it badly and immediately. One should have a Vedic target of family life to increase pure love and to get only children and not mere sexual pleasure.

you made this post in forum also i replied there a little about the sati system! Vedas ! you are reading wrongly… wrong translations ..

either learn sanskrit… (i too am doing so) or start reading vedas from arya samsaj jamnagar website!! (all your doubts will vanish) having still doubts … take verses to ask agniveer section one by one!! and use your intellect not just copy paste!!

you are not bringing a doubt but just copy pasting an article deriving conclusions yourself!!

The status of the woman that prevailed during the age of the Rig Veda was indeed a pathetic one. In the thinking of those times, she was one who could never be trusted and was the one who had the heart of a jackass. Urvashi, who was an Apsaras (goddess) , tells her lover Pururavas thus: “O Pururavas! Die not, flee not; may not the frenzied wolves tear thee apart. Verily, there must never be the companionship of women. For their hearts are as the heart of the Hyena. There can never be the company of women. Go back to home.” ( Rigvedia Shathapath brahmanam 11:5, 1:10 as quoted by D.D. Kosambi, Myth and Reality , p. 105)

This has been mentioned in the Rig Veda compilation as well.

” Pururavo Yamrathama prapaptha

Matha Vrakaso ashivasa ukshan

Navayasthrina ni sakya nisanthi

Salavya Kanam hrathyanenyatha ” (Rig Veda 10:95:15)

As for the Upanishads, they entertain a wholly negative vision with regard to woman. Woman is the cause of all misery in the world the woman, the embodiment of all sins, is the fuel of Hell fire. Look at some of the verses in the Yagnavalkopanishad:

” Jawalana athi duryepi sarasa api neerasa sthreey hi

narakagneena minthanam charudarunam ” (Shlokam 16)

” The woman, who burns from afar, and who apparently seems to be pleasing but is in reality displeasing, although beautiful, terrible as the fuel of Hell fire “.

” O Arjuna! Even those born in sin like the women, Vaishyas, and Shudras can attain to salvation if they seek refuge in me ” Even the advice of Manusmrithi which taught that the woman was to be worshipped, was that she was never to be allowed any freedom whatsoever.

“Woman who is protected in her adolescence by the father, in her youth by her husband, and in her old-age by her son, deserves no freedom at any time”.

It has been claimed on the authority of this verse that Manusmrithi teaches that the woman is to be protected under all circumstances. Any doubt, however, may be dispelled by the shlokam that immediately precedes this verse.

“Woman must not, by night or by day, be granted any freedom whatsoever, by her husband and other relatives. Even if they be immoral, she must still remain within their power”

The laws of Manusmrithi are such that woman is depicted merely as an instrument of man’s sexual gratification. This will become clear to any who reads the laws described in the fifth chapter and the ninth chapter.

What then is the point in saying that Manu had said that woman is to be worshipped? We have already seen that this was mentioned in the third chapter, 56th verse, of Manusmrith.

To understand what has been intended here, it would be sufficient to carefully read from the 55th to the 62nd stanzas. The summary of these statements are as follows: “Fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law who wish for great good fortune should revere these women and adorn them. The deities delight in places where women are revered, but where women are not revered all rites are fruitless. Where the women of the family are miserable, the family is soon destroyed, but it always thrives where the women are not miserable. Homes that are cursed by women of the family who have not been treated with due reverence are completely destroyed, as if struck down by witchcraft. Therefore men who wish to prosper should always revere those women with ornaments, clothes, and food at celebrations and festivals. There is unwavering good fortune in a family where the husband is always satisfied by the wife, and the wife by the husband. If the wife is not radiant she does not stimulate man; and because the man is unstipulated the making of children does not happen. If the woman is radiant, the whole family is radiant, but if she is not radiant the whole family is not radiant. Through bad marriages, the neglect of rites, failure to study the Veda, the transgressing against priests, families cease to be families.”

It becomes clear from these statements as to how woman is to be worshipped. Woman is to be worshipped by providing her with clothes, ornaments and food. Why are these to be given? Woman must be healthy; and beautiful so that her man’s passion is aroused. Woman is to make her body beautiful by adorning it with clothes and ornaments; that the man may be attracted by her. Woman is to be so worshipped that she be made a fitting decoration for the man’s bedroom. This is the law of Manu. Manu has nothing to say of the rights of woman.

The laws of Manusmrithi consider woman to be an individual forever bound by the chains of family relationships, with no rights of her own. The verses of the fifth chapter starting from 147 to 169 are all about the woman. Even if she were to become a widow in her youth, she is not to marry again. Even if her husband indulges in adultery, she is still to consider him on equal footing with God. However, the woman who commits in adultery was to be thrown to the dogs in public. Woman is not entitled to any share in the wealth of the family. The wages for her labor will be half that of the man. So goes the laws of Manusmrithi concerning woman.

The Devadasi system was a cruel and perverted institution which prevailed inIndia. There is evidence to show that the Devadasi system began in the Saptasindhu (India) right from the time of the Atharva Veda. The Devadasis

Were shudra women who had been consecrated to the temple as the maid servants of the gods. The function of the Devadasis was to fulfill the sexual needs of the upper castes who were the representatives of the gods on earth. This, in effect, clearly meant that they were the prostitutes of the temples.

It may be understood from a single reading of the Mahabarath the Ramayan that the Devadasis were an essential part of ancient Indian society. Dasharat had, in the army that he had prepared for Shri Ram, included women who made a living out of trading their physical charms. While proceeding to the Battle of Kurukshetra, chariots carrying Devadasis accompanied the legions of the Pandavas and the Kauravas.Devadasis were in the forefront to receive Shri Ram when he returned from his exile in the jungle. It was again the Devadasi community which had come to receive King Kaushika when he returned to the capital city after enduring severe trials. The Mahabharath relates that it was fifty young girls, at the very sight of whom one’s blood would boil with excitement, who welcomed Shuka who had come to visit the wise seer, Janakadika. It was again a Devadasi

whom the King Anuga employed to get what he wanted by using her to entice Rishyaganga who had never set his eyes upon a woman in his life time.

The tradition of carrying away and then marrying women also existed in ancientIndia. These marriages are named Raakshasam. It is the decree of Manusmrithi that the Raakshasam marriage is a matter of right for the Kshatriya (3:23,24). It can be seen from the Puranas that there were many who married in this fashion. Look at the very first marriage of Shri Krishna himself. It was Rukmani, the daughter of Bhishmak, the King of Vidarbha, who was the first wife of Shri Krishna. It was during the preparations for her marriage to the cousin of Shri Krishna that Shri Krishna carried her off and married her on the day before the wedding.

Sati was yet another cruel tradition which prevailed inIndia. The law of

Sati was that the wives were to immolate themselves in the funeral pyre of their dead husbands. The woman who performed Sati was then honored as the Satidevi.

The British government never sought to control Sati. They never liked to displease the Hindu priests. The British would thus maintain that the practice of the widows immolating themselves at the funeral pyre of their husbands was one that was based on Hindu beliefs and that it was made quite clear within the accepted canons of law and that, as such, to abolish it would be an act of intervention into the preserves of the Hindu religion itself. The man who brought forth a powerful opposition against their practice was Raja Ram Mohan Roy. It was after all his efforts to prevent the wife of his brother from immolating herself at the funeral prayer of her husband had failed and as he was thus forced to witness with his own eyes the horrible scene of her burning away to her end that he turned into a crusader against Sati. It was, however, only after a prolonged and sustained campaign of opposition against Sati that, in 1929, Sati was declared illegal during the reign of Lord William Benedict.

Concerted efforts are, however, being made today to revive Sati and such other malpractices. It has not been too long since we read of Roopkanwar from Devata village of Rajasthan who was thrown into the flames of the funeral pyre of her husband.

Another law that prevailed in ancientIndiawas that the widows who did not perform Sati were to shave their heads and live in complete isolation within the society. Even those small children, who were all of six or seven years, who became widows after their child marriage, were to shave their heads and remain as widows for the rest of their lives. These widows who would then forced to live like beggars were to have but one meal a day. On the days of the new moon they were to confine themselves day and night and were never to partake of even a drop of water. Indeed, it is greatly possible that the Satidevis, so highly praised as the women who chose Sati of their own accord, were, in reality, women who chose ghastly end in the flames of self immolation as a better option than a life that would be so turned into a prolonged torture.

On one side we see that even while the encroachment upon women’s rights prevailed in ancientIndia, the worship of women, too, existed alongside. It is also claimed, making reference to the worship of goddesses that women are given a very high position in the great vision of Hinduism which teaches that women are to be worshipped. This claim is, however, without substance. There is no evidence to show that the position of woman has in any way evolved from the Vedic stand that the woman had the heart of a Hyena. To imagine that women enjoyed a privileged position simply because they were worshipped as goddesses would be but an exercise in stupidity.

Sati is, after all, the most cruel and extreme form of the encroachment upon the rights of woman. This is made clear by the fact that the woman who undergoes Sati would thenceforth be known as Satidevi.

The origins of goddess worship are to be found in the blind and perverted notions of sexuality. The names Subagor,Bagaradya,Bagamalini and the like have been used to describe goddesses.Bagath have the meaning vagina. The meaning of the aforementioned descriptions is respectively ‘She who has good vagina’, ‘She who is worshipped in the ………..’, and ‘She who bears the ……….’. Amongst the more shorter and concise names, Pragathba means ‘she who has attained to maturity, she who impassions her husband and she who is skilled in the act of sexual intercourse’.Vidagda means ‘she who is the least ashamed of the sexual act and who is adept at the different variations thereof’ (V.V. Shrijan:Ya devi sarvaboodeshu,p.19)

Where, indeed, is the Qur’anic vision which declared that the woman possessed an independent existence of her own and that she, too, had her own legal rights as well and which saw her as the light of the house and as the mother of society? And where stands the vision of the Manusmrithi which states that the woman is to be worshipped that she may be made a decoration of the bed chamber of her man? In reality, both these views exhibit such a wide range of disparity as to never call forth even the most remote comparison.

Permanent illness of the wife. There are ailments that prevent sexual relations as well as pregnancy. What are the husbands of women with such disorders to do? There may also be those who struggle to even perform the household chores due to such unending health disorders. In all these cases the remedy often resorted to is adultery, divorce or polygamy. In divorcing a woman afflicted with a permanent disorder, she is actually being forced into the street here; too, the only humane solution to the problem is polygamy. Certain religious texts prescribe divorce in all the aforementioned circumstances. Look at the commandment of the Manusmrithi:

” Vandhyashda methi Vedyabde

Deshamethu mruthapraja

Ekadashi Sthree janani

Sathyasthapriya vadinee ”

(Manu Smrithi 9:81)

“A baran life may be superseded in the eighth year; one whose children have died, in the tenth; one who bears (only) daughters, in the eleventh; but one who says unpleasant things (may be superseded) immediately”

Many religions actually recommend a life of perpetual sorrow for the widows. Look at the judgment of the Manu Smrithi:

” Aa Suthr maranalkshantha niyatha brahmacharini

Yodharmeka patninam kamkshanthi Thamanuthamam ”

(Manu Smrithi 5:158)

“She should be long- suffering until death, self- restrained, and chased, striving (to fulfill) the unsurpassed duty of women who have one husband.”

It is from such legal prescriptions that, in due course of time, the system of

Sati that asks for the wife to die at the pyre of her husband originated.

The Hindu scriptures, which saw woman as the private property of man, and formulate laws in accordance thereof, does not even make a mention of making her a beneficiary in the wealth of inheritance. A reading of the Hindu books makes us to understand that the wife is the private property of the husband, which he can always give away in charity or for the use of another. Sudarshan who makes avail able his wife for the entertainment of the guest(Mahabharath: commandments) and Mithrasah who hands over his wife to Vasishta (Peace)both are indicative of this. There is nothing in the Hindu scriptures imply that the daughters are entitled to the wealth of their father. Indeed, the Manusmrithi has laid down the law that it is the sons who are entitled to the wealth of inheritance.

” Oordan pishushcha mathrucha samethabrathrasamam

Bajeran Pytrakamriktha manishasthi hijeevatha ”

(Manusmrithi 9:104)

“After the father and mother (are dead), the brothers should assemble and divide the paternal estate equally, for they have no power over the two of them while they are alive”.

Hindu religion texts have ruled that the woman is wholly ineligible to stand as witness. For instance,

” Sthree bala vrathe Kidava mathonmathi bishasthaka:

Rangavathari Pallandi Kudakridwileadiya

Pathilka patharthe sambandi Sahayari puthaskara

Sahasi Drushta dohashcha Nirduthatyosthe sukshina ”

(Yagnavalkasmrithi 2:70,71)

“Woman, child, the aged, the gambler, the intoxicated, the in sane, the one who has sinned by way of Brahmahatya Charana Singer, actor etc.), Pakandi (atheist), the one who makes false documents, the handicapped, the friend, the one who lends money, the helper,the enemy, the thief, the bandit, the one with an apparent negative impression, the one who has been cast aside by his relatives – all these are not eligible to stand as witnesses.”

Why women are deemed non-eligible to bear testimony? The explanation of the

Manusmrithi is as follows:

“ Ekolubdasthu Sakshheesyal Bahrushu

Chorina sthriya sthree budhera sthirathatu

Doshysh chanyopiye vratha ”

(Manusmrithi 8:77)

“ One single man who is not greedy may be a witness, but not several women, even if they are unpolluted, because a woman’s understanding is unreliable, nor even other men who are rife with bad qualities ”

What must the Hindu woman, who has lost her husband, do?

Observe the ruling of the Manu Smrithi:

” Kamanthuksha paye dehan pushpa moola Falai Shubai

Nathu namapi grahanee yaath pathyow preda parasyathu

Aaseetha maranaal Kshantha niyatha brahmacharinee

Yo Dharma Aekapathni namkamk shanthi thamanuthamam. ”

(Manusmrithi 5:157,158)

“After the death of the husband (she) is to while away time by wasting her body on a diet of pure tuber, fruits, flowers etc. She is not to utter the name of another man with the intention of lust. After the death of the husband, the woman is to remain steadfast, patient and pure; as one ever conscious of the Brahma;as one abstaining from the consumption of wine and flesh and as one who is ever desirous of the dharma of the righteous woman bereft of her husband ”.

The cruelty to which this law makes subject the women who have become widows owing to the death of their husbands in the prime of their youth need not be further mentioned here. That she is refused the right to remarry will ultimately lead her to a life of immorality. Thus the consequences of this law will have to be borne by both the individual and society. Indeed, such laws stand as an obstacle in the creation of a sound society and, for that reason, and that reason alone, will remain impracticable forever.

Is the ruling of the Manu Smrithi.The situation that prevailed inIndiawas, however, even more appalling? The woman was instructed to immolate herself at the funeral pyre of her husband. This was the cruel tradition of

Sati. Those women who refused to comply with the demands of this tradition were to shave their heads and to live in isolation within the society. The law stipulated that even the six and seven years olds were forced to shave their heads and to live like after the death of their husbands imposed upon them through child marriage. The only facility that was allowed them was one meal each day!.

I think u forgot to read the starting paras of this page , v r talking about Manusmriti , the positives of respecting women leads to a successful , thriving and progressing society . Western world and specially the Muslims r forgetting it and hence are villains of the world since they r losing their mind n becoming terrorists

What all u wrote is totally irrelevant and out of the topic concerned !!!!!!!!!!!!

This is from a man’s point of view. Its biased to begin with. Dont like Manu. Violates my freedom. His word is not law. I can write some law from a woman’s perspective and that will become part if Hinduism. That’s the beauty. ( ofcourse I can’t cause I’m not a scholar and th is requires dedication and discipline) Will wait for someone who makes sense to me as a woman. But I do not agree with Manu ‘Karyeshu Dasi, Karaneshu Manthri; Bhojeshu Mata, Shayaneshu Rambha, Roopeshu lakshmi, Kshamayeshu Dharitri, Shat dharmayukta, Kuladharma Pathni I wonder why a man can’t wash utensils, be an assistant in wife’s business, be good looking (that is a long shot but at least smell better) be good in bed. Be like a gigolo. That should have been in manu. Not instructing how to protect women. Bhakshak bhi tumi rakshak bhi tumi, meri to waat laga diye tumi.

Vedas do not get into such specifics. All they emphasize is that hygiene and health should be top priority. Beyond that, depending upon the available facilities and resources, one needs to decide the course of action accordingly. To associate all this with unscientific dogmas is against Vedic view of life.

Actually, i was talking about how a woman in periods treated in a hindu home.

Like, we can’t prepare food, touch, recite mantra…all these things which are practised in almost each hindu traditional family. Are all these things backed by vedas or as you said these are”unscientific dogmas”?

To me these things look idiotic, i mean this is a natural thing, then why we are considerd as impure?

I know you are too busy with the other stuff, but can you explain it bit more. I would be very grateful to you.

1. As I said, Vedas simply assert that hygiene and health should be maintained.

2. These practices are not that unscientific if you consider the era in which they were documented in books. Its a known fact that women face discomfort and have to take extra care of hygiene during these days. And till a few decades ago, household chores like preparing food, washing clothes, cleaning home were very strenuous processes. Further maintaining hygiene in these days was a cumbersome task as sanitation technology was still very primitive. Under those circumstances, it was wise to give break to women from these tasks during these days. For example, even today, doctors advise women to not perform heavy exercises during these days.

To maintain strictness of this, perhaps the prohibition was overemphasized. And not only among Hindus, restrictions on menstruating woman is present in almost all communities of world.

3. However in current era, when hygiene maintenance has advanced significantly from medieval era. And household tasks are simple with gadgets, Even cooking is now all about click of a gas lighter. No more puffing into fire, sitting in hot environment etc. Thus, to follow these recommendations so seriously would be dogma and nothing more.

The only recommendation can be that one should not over-exert if feeling weak and should maintain hygiene. But this recommendation is for all people at all times.

4. As for mantras, there is no logic whatsoever in its prohibition. In fact, reciting mantras or meditating may be a good thing to do when one is forced to not exert in other things due to a weak body.

Traditional families follow traditions. They see what has been followed by their previous 2 generations and try to replicate the same with necessary modifications. Over few generations, even the modifications add up to sometimes traditions that are quite different from inception.

To simply follow the last 2 generations is considered mark of religiousness. This is not wrong in a way. But to imitate it blindly without use of faculty of reason or comparing with the very first source is myopia. This myopia caused us to swallow the fly of casteism and gender-discrimination and a host of baseless superstitions. And sooner we put on the right glasses, better for our long term success.

I’m not a scholar, but this is what I have learned about rules for women in menstruation. The basic idea was to protect her physically and psychologically during those days of the month. While we generally want praan to rise upward all the time, at that particular time women have a downward flow in their bodies. This is to be respected since it is a mechanism required by nature. Actions which force praan upwards either by a persons own actions like chanting or by outside methods, like flames in the kitchen or at the temple altar were not recommended for the woman in those days. Vibrations spread very easily by touch. If she is in contact with too many people at that time, her downward flow gets disturbed and it is harmful for her. Ancient traditions gave a lot of importance to a woman’s menstrual cycle because disturbance at the hormonal level leads to many problems for the woman and her possible future children The main idea was top let her rest during the time. To not make her do any physical work, prepare and bring her meals to her etc. The body is in the process of rejecting material that had been gathered over the month in preparation for a child. This very potent material is being discharged. And so she needs extra care. Women often report being irritable during these days. SO in a psychologically delicate state it is better not to interact with outsiders, unknown people, or be in any arguments etc. They knew that if the woman was adequately protected on these days, she would be relatively healthy throughout her life.

It may be that in recent times this practice has been distorted a little and recommendations have become rules, rules have become diktats and perhaps those have been enforced in an authoritarian manner by people who said “Just do what I say’ because they’ve never been told the reason either.

The reason we do not visit temples including offerings and prayers in our mandir at home is this – when women have their monthly periods – we do generate a peculiar smell… It is this offensive smell that repels spiritual beings, higher souls.

Like we offer fragrant flowers and aromas while doing puja to attract these beings – similarly we refrain from attracting them during this time because these beings are only energy and not in bodily form. Their contact with us is purely basis smell and when we offer our pujas to them during this time, they do come and then get repelled. It’s based on basic logic no superstition.

Thanks to vagavan and agniveer team. I was waiting to get our religion as such form. I believe if vagavan want all the serious misconception of our religion will be washed out. I personally tried to translate agniveer writing in bengali and also tried to translate the mantras you quote in bengali for our bengali brothers and sisters.

If say mother,daughter or sister is indulged in bad habits or are having sex with some other person say Muslims etc then what punishment does Vedas have for such women.

Say if sister is indulged in sexual activity with muslims and later on she want to repent what is punishment and if she still continue then what is punishment.Can you please quote from some vedas or Manu smiriti.I will be obliged.

Though the punishments need to change from time to time but ideally as told by Manu, any man or woman, if found indulged in adultery and thus in cheating his/her wife/husband and children, deserves harshest punishments including death. However for death punishment, consent of his/her wife/husband and children is must. But no doubt in giving him/her severest of punishment such that no other can even think of cheating his/her wife/husband and children in future.

Please read 6th chapter of Satyarth Prakash and find references for the same.

For someone who repents, Manu suggests a system of Prayashchit. And it is said that the best Prayashchit is to feel guilty and resolve to never commit such mistake again, and then start afresh.

Punishments are for those who are intentional perpetrators of crime. And who conduct crime despite all efforts to dissuade them. Today, to punish someone for adultery, one will have to first punish the media and government for allowing nonsense to pollute the minds and deemphasizing the role of character in education.

There are many verses in Vedas that are used during Shuddi Sanskar as well as a chapter in Manu Smriti dedicated to this. The essence however remains what has been discussed above.

11.229: More and more the heart is filled with remorse against misdeeds conducted, more and more the body gets purified of the misdeed. And hence by cleaning the heart one gets rid of sin.

11.230: By repenting in heart, one gets rid of sanskaars of sin in future. And when the person resolves that he shall not commit the mistake again, then he becomes pure again.

11.231: By thinking about Law of Karma that no one can escape, one should resolve to not commit sin again. And emphatically conduct noble deeds.

11.232: TO absolve of sins committed knowingly or unknowingly, one should resolve never to commit them again.

11.233: One should repent and feel remorse until the mind gets light and feels satisfied. One should do prayashchit till all guilt feelings are deleted and one resolves to never repeat the mistake or even think of it again.

A woman should be always be supported and she should be protected and shouldn’t be left alone to suffer. As a child she should be supported and protected by father. when she is married it is the responsibility of her husband to support her. when her husband is dead, it is the responsibility of her children to take care of her and support her. And therefore under no circumstances she should be left alone and should always be protected and get the support she deserves.

Great Artcile on woman right in Vedic religion. But if a woman being raped then what should husband do from Vedic aspect?. Should husband leave his wife because she has been raped. If yes, why? What the fault of woman? What should be treatment according to Vedic aspect?

No. While there is severe punishment for someone who rapes a woman (even we recommend death penalty for crime of rape), there is no provision in Vedic culture to leave a wife under any circumstance. Refer Manusmriti 9.101 provided above.

As per Vedic treatment, the guilty should be punished and the couple should start life afresh. The concept of punishing someone due to fault of someone else is against Vedas.

If one wants to cite from Uttar Ramayan, please note that this is largely a fake book not written by Valmiki. So all these stories of Sita Vanvaas, Shambuka killing, Washerman comment etc are stories of fiction. Even the Sita Agni Pariksha part is adulterated which is evident from a reading of the text.

When Manu Smriti recommends marrying a nice lady even if she belongs to a low background otherwise, where is the question of rejecting a wife because a criminal attacked her!

is death penalty 100% justified???i mean i am a bit confuse about the punishment…as even maharshi valmiki made mistake in his pre-rishi life due to lack of knowledge may be…. could you explain it please???thanx

valmiki- his actual name is agni sharma..he was eldest among the three children to his parents..his father used to teach vedas and hymns to his children and some other students..but unfortunately this agni sharma was dumb and poor in learning them and he was unfit to recite and learn them..he gave up practising vedas..but he was eldest, so his parents used to live him and he got married to a gal..after some days his father was retired and he was now in pressure corner to earn something for their lively hood..so they moved to near aranya and he used to go into deep aranya and there he was robbing the forest trespassers, whatever they got he used to take away..but he never killed anyone and he always used to be rational, one day a group of saints lead by bharadwaja muni were going and he threatened them to give away everything they got..as he asked they gave everything they got..but after giving they asked why are you robbing the trespassers..he replied, ‘for my and my family livelihood i chose this job’, for u and ur family livelihood u choose this, then what about the lost ones livelihood, it affects badly for some people..ok you are telling for u and ur family, by doing this u are earning some sin every time, is the sin suffered by you alone or will your family also share some of your sin, as he was a rational thinker he told i never thought about this, i want to ask my family, u be here i will be back by noon, he went to his father mother wife and children and enquired whether they share the sin or not, all told we are not willing to share ur sin..it is your duty to feed us,so we are enjoying your sin earned money, then he went back to munis and told the fact and his heart broken situation, then he returned what all the things were grabbed, and asked munis what to do then, then they told some powerful syllabus of beejaksharas..but again he was very poor in learning them.. but the sage cleverly taught only two beejaksharas..which sounds ‘raa’ ‘ma’…which means ‘raa’-the syllabi representing the friction/agni karamu, and ‘ma’-the syllabi representing nectar of love and softness, so they asked him to recite these two words such that his rage and serenity balances him to next level of knowledge and capability….he then left everything, he sat there itself under a tree and started reciting the word raama..the muni pungavas left that place and went to do pence and after twelve years they were returning along that place itself through aranya..then they noticed some tapas inside from a mud heap under a tree..then they remembered the past and was stunned by the fact that the past robber agnisharma was with great concentration and unbelievable faith in satva guna..as he got out from mud heap(valmikam)..he was named as valmiki by the muni…now agnisharma was called as valmiki by his nature of act…he got that name as ‘pourusha namam’..and then the valmiki used to live his life as saint and he one day met narada and he asked about 16 best qualities in a single person and he comes to know about raama and he writes ramayanam..that was the rest of the story every one knows…. here our topic was the concept doing sin and getting capital punishment…………..

the degree of sin committed by agnisharma was not eligible for a capital punishment(death penalty) and the death punishment is certainly acceptable under its circumstances….those who ever do such sin is grandly welcomed to get punished by life sentence. like see if a person is harmful to one or society in other times other than sleep then he should be let down to sleep for good.

In Valmiki Ramayana when Ravana came to Panchavati and went to Sita for asking Bhiksha that time he appreciated Sita and said some verses about her beauty which was in todays language ashlil(Porno) (Arnyakand Sarg 46, shlok 16-24). What did you say? Is it prakshipta? Ayodhyakand Sarg19 What Ram says about Kaikai & Daharath? See Aadi Parva in Mahabharat,the story of Deerghatamasa and how he become blind. Bruhaspati has raped his mother Mamata & cursed Deerghatamas. See the story of Yayati daughter Madhavi. Yayati offered his daughter to Galava & the Galava offered her service to various kings & his guru. Is it fair as per Manu? as Manu was ancient that Ram & Krushna. In Kishkindhakand Angada has blamed Sugreeva for his attraction to Tara. Vanara were humans & following Vedic Tradition. When Vali defeated Ravana there is a treaty between them that Vaali has right to make snaan & sandhya on three seas(sagaras). Dont say that Vaanara & Rakshas were not aryas because Valmiki has mentioned it not only in Uttar kand but in other parts also.

@joshi : so what are you conveying? are you drawing an inference on the Veda or not ? if yes then you are logically defunct , as these occurrences have no bearing on the Veda. and if no , these are just instances of history and should be ignored as bad influences.

Mr Agneeveer says that except Veda everything is courruped. How he will decide which part of any book is courrupted and is he competent authority to decide that this part is courrupt & which is not. Second thing is that in Rugveda there is sukta of Devapi.This Devapi was the brother of Shantanu(The father of Bhishma) When Devapi,s sukta is included in Rugveda(not Rigveda) it can be said that Rugveda was compiled at the time of Mahabharata. So the Vedas studied by Ram,Ravan,Hanuman,Vasitha & Vishwamitra must be different. Also in Rugveda there were sukta of Vishwamitra,Vasitha,Agastya,Jamadagni hence we can say that the Veda at the time of Rama was also under compilation as these sages were at the time of Rama. I want to tell you that do not just come to conclusion that this is pure & that is impure. Lot of research is required for any conclusion and also only Agniveer could not decide it. Second thing do not entertain muslims & christians on this site as their religion does not permit them the coexistance with other religions and they are hating hindus.If they like hindu/vedic culture then they are not true muslims or christians.

@Joshi: it is clearly mentioned that, be it any text it is to be accepted only to the extent it complies with the spirit of the veda (shruti). I have no idea what “Rug Veda” is the veda that are being talking about are only ऋक , साम , यजुर , अथर्व (rik, sam, yajum and atharv) i.e. श्रुति (shruti)

because this Rug Veda that you talk about contains inferences of post Mahabharata times how does it prove that Ram,Ravan,Hanuman,Vasitha & Vishwamitra were exposed to a different set of scriptures? and if there are suktas whose rishis had the names of the people you mention, how does it infer that these were the rishish of the ramayana or mahabahrat times? My name is Ankur there could be people by this name a million years before me and a million year after me (as long as samskrit is alive, and it will be) ॐ तत् सत् ब्रह्मार्पणं अस्तु

How can you say that the Devapi,Vasitha,Viswamitra,Agastya mentioned in Ramayana & Mahabharata were not same peoples who were composed suktas in Rug-veda? It is to be proved that they were different peoples? My question is simple that All Vedas what is available today were not same at the time of Rama and we have to think about it. If I have any different opinion then why you are simply opposing without properly thinking about the points or facts shown by me.

I really need to highlight Sita vanavas is not adulterated .. it tells about ksharthiya dharma .. I n past all the 3 castes except shudra has sacred theard .. all of them were to read some part of vedhas , brahmins used to teach them , Sita vanavas says that if there is conflict in decision b/w people , family a king must give decision in favour of his people ..

THE IDEA of HINDUISM is the mindset of people , if your mindset is good . , then things around will also be good .. and vice versa

“…Uttar Ramayan…is largely a fake book not written by Valmiki”. This is untrue, not based on facts. The washer-man and other episodes are not merely true but have deep meanings as well. Get to hear them from saints (mahapurushas).